This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ PATCH:
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
I don't think it makes sense or it serves any useful purpose removing
you from maintainership, although I believe you should exercise it
with more openness.
Are we talking here about my role as a C++ maintainer? What kind of
additional openness would you like to see? I have no secret patches to
G++ lying around anywhere; every single line of code I've written is
checked in to the FSF CVS repository. I haven't worked out a secret
pact with any other maintainers to do anything to G++. Mostly, I've
confined myself recently to fixing regressions (many of which come from
other people's code) and reviewing patches.
If we're talking about my role as the RM, I think that's a separate
discussion. You can start a new thread for that, if you like.
| When I've made up my mind, I think it's a lot more useful to tell
| you that, than to waste everyone's time pretending I've not come to
| a conclusion. Even then, I'm always willing to be persuaded
| otherwise --
But that is self-contradictory: "being persuaded otherwise"
assumes dialog; that can't happen when you're unwilling to discuss the
issues on the ground that it would be a long discussion wasting
You elided the important part of my statement: if I've made up my mind,
then arguing with me probably won't convince me. But, if you can
convince other people, then that will cause me to rethink.
That's part of the virtue of having co-maintainers: we get checks and
balances. I respect Jason and Nathan's opinions very highly, and if you
persuade them, that would impress me. And, if you convince them both,
you don't really need to impress me; we generally seem to do some kind
of majority-rules thing.
That's exactly what happened with respect to making G++ compile with a
C++ compiler; enough other people seemed convinced that it was
worthwhile that I re-thought. That occurred through the passage of time
and lots of conversation, not through an argument with you.